<quoted text>One other thing, its your own theories that mock you, how life began,.....light shining on atoms,a primordial sea stirred by winds and currents, lightning striking a collection of compounds,radiation ,chemicals poofing,aliens deposting life forms!anything but a creator! because the truth is you and your ilk cannot possibly deal with those implications...Denial

Seems like it's you that can't deal with not being specially created...just another lifeform.

Ergo chemistry creates life by natural means"Has the can of whammo slime arrived yet?take your chemical slime and set it in the window for the sun to shine on it, poly says light will activate the life process.Now find 10 or 12 other puddle gooists and pool your intelligence.

No need. I was correct when I demonstrated that chemistry creates life by natural means. So subsequently you responded with mockery rather than rebuttal. For mockery to work it needs to be combined with a rational point, or at the very least a modicum of wit. You lack both.

bohart wrote:

God

Can you please provide scientific evidence which is objectively verifiable via the scientific method that such an entity exists?

If you could you would be Jesus.

bohart wrote:

is life, an eternal source of this life,he exists outside this universe that he made, and all life was began by this entity.

Thus it violates your rule that "life MUST come from life!"

Twice.

bohart wrote:

Its logical

... within its own axioms, sure.

Just as a mathematical model for a 2 dimensional universe is logical. And so is a mathematical model for a 16 dimensional universe. However they cannot logically co-exist.

Unless they exist as separate universes within a multiverse.

bohart wrote:

because the alternative is comical.

Your baseless and subjective opinion is based only on your own ignorance and incredulity.

bohart wrote:

It's either that ,or all that exists , came into being by accident

Not necessarily accidental. For example rain doesn't fall by "accident", although there is no mechanism of intelligence necessary for it to occur.

Besides, now you are dishonestly switching subjects (again) from abio to universal origins.

bohart wrote:

from nothing

Not necessarily, as most pre-Big Bang hypotheses posit a "something". Which we HAVE been through before, it's just you have a short memory.

bohart wrote:

for no purpose, with no meaning, and absolutely no direction.

Purpose and meaning are subjective. Direction is all directions. Discovered by Hubble.

bohart wrote:

Thats not only illogical, its irrational.

Lying to the extent you do is irrational as it does not help your case. If you had one. Now let's evaluate the rationality of your position:

An invisible magic Jew wizard got bored for eternity so decided to make the universe for the explicit purpose of testing humans on their worthiness for eternal slavery. This wizard who had a nose, belly-button, fingers, toes, backside, male genitalia and a beard decided to make STUPID humans, tell them not to eat from a tree which he could have quite easily made too high behind an electrical fence in another country on another planet in another galaxy on the far side of the universe, but instead put it within easy reach, lied to them, and what's more made an evil talking lizard to tempt them into eating from it in order to see if he would embrace the virtue of ignorance, which they subsequently failed because god being god already knew what was gonna happen anyway and then condemn the WHOLE of humanity for the actions of his own kids which he couldn't control. And anyone from then on who didn't do what he wanted was to be tortured for all eternity by some horny red fella with a pitchfork. Oh, and he made talking donkeys too and left the message of "TRUTH" with a bunch of superstitious goat-herders who thought the Earth was flat. After a few genocides but before the really big one at the end.

No sentient being not bound up in denial or with some simmering hatred for God would believe that.

So what you're saying is that anyone who doesn't agree with your baseless religious opinions which you are unable to demonstrate scientifically MUST therefore be denying evidence which you CANNOT provide and hate something which as far as can be scientifically determined may not even exist at all in the first place.

And apparently you're the rational one.

Hating wilful ignorance is not the same as hating God. Your problem is that you put your god in the position of being synonymous with your wilful ignorance.

<quoted text>"....the Bible contains SOME fictional elements".....Really, are you sure? The first sentence should have raised some red flags.........."God created the Heavens and the earth"..........thats just about enough fiction for one day.

Actually it is always possible that (a) God (or Gods) created the universe.

<quoted text>Tick,Tick...."verifiable evidence", that isn't true, there is none , and you know it, there never has been.Which places you into one of the catagories, a simmering hatred of God,and how he runs the universe or just run of the mill denial.Oh! maybe both.'

Which bit hasn't been verified? Abio? Hey, we agree. The Big Bang? Well actually it's looking more and more likely that that's the way it happened, although it's quite fuzzy at the point of singularity. Or were you just talking about evolution this time? As you DO tend to switch between all three quite haphazardly with no coherent pattern.

But in which case, yeah. Evolution has absolutely been scientifically verified. Whether (a) God was responsible or not.

<quoted text>One other thing, its your own theories that mock you, how life began,.....light shining on atoms,a primordial sea stirred by winds and currents, lightning striking a collection of compounds,radiation ,chemicals poofing,aliens deposting life forms!anything but a creator! because the truth is you and your ilk cannot possibly deal with those implications...Denial

The only reason why we can't deal with that implication is because your team has been unable to make the concept falsifiable (and therefore scientific).

At least aliens is POTENTIALLY falsifiable (though still not taken very seriously).

You whine about evolution, I demonstrate it. So you switch to whining about abio. I address it. Your comeback then involves ignorant criticisms of the Big Bang. I address that. You go back to lame puddle goo jokes (an abio reference).

<quoted text>Actually it is always possible that (a) God (or Gods) created the universe.It's also possible that it/they are not necessary.

If a human baby is raised by monkeys, the human will act like a monkey....correct? If a child is raised by wolves, the child will act like a wolf.....agreed? A child learns a religion, it will live that religion......so true? See, monkey see, monkey do. A human is a product of its environment. It adapts to survive or it dies. Religion warps reality....its a survival mechanism, formed out of fear..........they are out there.

<quoted text>Well, perhaps that. But you've also dropped any pretense of engaging in a serious debate.What I said was: "So, are you saying it's outside of the power of God to have created life in the manner described by science?"

<quoted text>sure there is... i given it to you often... you just keep lying to yourself...like most cult members.how could i hate a myth? your god doesn't even have the ability to generate hate...let alone anything a universe...

you LOVE that word CULT as in CULTURE. Same idea there. Or do you just do everything your own way and do not conform to anything?

how would anyone know? with no proof of any god or gods, how would anyone have a clue as their supposed power if one did exist? maybe there are gods, but all they can do is party tricks in a tiny, curled-up string theory dimension the a fraction of the size of a quark?

<quoted text>If a human baby is raised by monkeys, the human will act like a monkey....correct? If a child is raised by wolves, the child will act like a wolf.....agreed? A child learns a religion, it will live that religion......so true? See, monkey see, monkey do. A human is a product of its environment. It adapts to survive or it dies. Religion warps reality....its a survival mechanism, formed out of fear..........they are out there.

<quoted text>how would anyone know? with no proof of any god or gods, how would anyone have a clue as their supposed power if one did exist? maybe there are gods, but all they can do is party tricks in a tiny, curled-up string theory dimension the a fraction of the size of a quark?

You're right. No one needs to see God or know where he is anyway. He will be constantly harassed and bomb-arded. He doesn't exist on earth so there's no point of even trying to locate him anywhere in the universe.

The string theory is really not an original concept. It was probably a stolen idea from the Kabbalah or some ancient wisdom.

<quoted text>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_ExodusAccording to Exodus 12:37-38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[15] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550.[16] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people,[17] compared with an entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE of around 3 to 3.5 million.[18] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[19]No evidence has been found that indicates Egypt ever suffered such a demographic and economic catastrophe or that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[20] Some scholars have rationalised these numbers into smaller figures...A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[3] and most archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".[

Very likely, nevertheless what are all those 1000 BC with Judean derived artefacts fortresses doing there. The story a methaphore for exile and delivery which is the entire theme of the religion.

But i have a language issue.Why do orthodox jews keep insisting that it should read çhiefs (of thousands). Well because they understand the language better, no doubt.We find that in translations just about everything becomes thousand. ish, alef, elef, alfei, elfei, beelfei etc.f-ph. It alltogether get's a bit ridiculous.A census in the old days would usually just count the man that were of fighting ability and age...even in the roman days.ulpan-teaching , study(room)Going back even further, we find that Klein says that that (hebrew <-) phlé meaning "teaching" derives from a "base probably meaning originally 'to be linked together, be connected'[cp. Akkadian ulapu (=band), elippu (=ship), whence arose the meanings 'to join, to be familiar with'."

From this early meaning we get the word elef (phlé)- thousand, which Klein claims originally denoted "group, crowd". Another related meaning of elef is "part of a tribe" which originally referred to "part of a tribe consisting of a thousand people". The head of the tribe was known as an aluf - and from this we get the modern Hebrew words for "general (in the army)" and champion.

Alef is a guttural letter and therefore occasionally switches with other guttural letters - heh, ayin as well as yod.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.